|
Professionals - Funeral Directors. Taccone v. Registrar, Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002
In Taccone v. Registrar, Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 (Div Court, 2024) the Divisional Court considered a rarely-used 'burial site investigation costs' provision of the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002:[4] The applicants seek judicial review of the decision of the Registrar appointed under the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002, SO 2002, c 33. The statute allows individuals to seek reimbursement of costs that they are required to incur on a burial site investigation required by the statute if the costs pose an undue financial burden.
[5] In the decision at issue in this proceeding, the Registrar refused the applicants’ request for reimbursement of approximately $340,000 that they say they were required to spend on a burial site investigation under the statute. The Registrar had previously approved payment of approximately $165,000 on account of undue financial burden of the burial site investigation. He determined that the remaining amounts claimed by the applicants were spent by them in Stage 4 investigations that were beyond the scope of the burial site investigation required under the statutory scheme.
[6] This is apparently the first time this statute and the registrar’s statutory power to approve or refuse a reimbursement request have been before the court. . Registrar, Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 v. Lilley
In Registrar, Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002 v. Lilley (Div Court, 2022) the Divisional Court considered an appeal from the LAT by the "Registrar, Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act, 2002" that sought to uphold it's decision to carry out a Notice of Proposal that would have revoked the funeral director licence of the respondent. The case is not particularly legally compelling, but this statute is rarely heard in the courts.
|
